The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/07/1994, 7 - EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR BICYCLE LANES ON JOHNSON AVENUE I`lu^��III�IIIII��I p'W�II II�III vJ r MEETING OATS: IIII I f Ilu�„II Cio san suis oBispo JUNE 7, 1994 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Mike McCluskey, Public Works Director LX-9. SUBJECT: Evaluation of Alternatives for Bicycle Lanes on Johnson Avenue CAO RECOMMENDATION: Review alternates with Staff, take public testimony, and by motion: (1) Approve Alternate#6 for bike lanes on Johnson Avenue between Lizzie Street and Orcutt Road; (Pages 12, 139 14) (2) . Approve Alternate#6.A. for bike lanes on Johnson Avenue between Lizzie and Buchon Streets; (Page 24) (3) Approve Alternate#1 for bike lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon and Monterey Streets; (Page 31) (4) Direct Staff to have plans prepared for segments of Johnson Avenue where bike lanes are approved (if not already prepared) and authorize Staff to consolidate these plans with plans approved by the City Council on April 19,1994 and advertise the project (with appropriate adjustments to the Engineer's estimate and contingencies if necessary); and (5) Authorize Staff to award a contract to the lowest responsible bidder if bid is within the Engineer's estimate. I. BACKGROUND A. REPORT IN BRIEF On April 19, 1994, the City Council considered a request by Staff to approve plans and specifications for the installation of 4.6 miles of bicycle lanes. The Council approved the plans for all bicycle lanes except for those proposed for Johnson Avenue. Staff was directed to evaluate design alternatives and to hold a workshop to review alternatives and other traffic management changes with Johnson Avenue area residents in hopes of reaching a consensus solution which accommodates bicyclists. This report presents the outcome of the neighborhood workshop held on May 19, 1994 at the Church of the Nazarene and the response to a questionnaire sent to 2,500 Johnson area residents. This report presents bike lane proposals for three distinct segments of Johnson Avenue: (A) Lizzie Street to Orcutt Road; (B) Lizzie Street to Buchon Street; and (C) Buchon Street to-Monterey Street. For each of the three segments, alternatives are evaluated and staff recommendations presented. B. FEEDBACK FROM THE JOHNSON AREA RESIDENT QUESTIONNAIRE The Staff mailed notices to 2,496 Johnson area households (see Exhibit A) inviting residents to participate in an evening workshop held at the Church of the Nazarene on May 19, 1994. The notice included a brief questionnaire that asked residents to identify their preferences for the design of Johnson Avenue and for other design elements within the right-of-way (see Exhibit B). The Staff received 369 completed questionnaires or 15% of those distributed which is a statistically significant response. ��"h�i�N►�IIIIIII�i ��u city of San tui S OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT The results of the resident questionnaire are summarized on the following page. The questionnaire response shows that area residents are about evenly divided between those who prefer to leave Johnson Avenue (Lizzie to Orcutt) the way it is today and those who prefer to accommodate some type of bicycle lane. When comparing the responses of people who live on Johnson Avenue vs. those that live elsewhere in the area, Johnson Avenue residents more strongly support bike lanes of some type (61%) than those living elsewhere in the area (49%). Response to the second part of the questionnaire shows that "more enforcement of the speed limit" received the greatest support. C. FEEDBACK FROM THE JOHNSON AVENUE AREA WORK SHOP About 170 people attended a workshop held at the Church of the Nazarene on the Thursday, May 19, 1994 (Workshop Agenda attached as Exhibit Q. After providing a history of the process and identifying the purpose of the work shop,Staff divided the discussion of Johnson Avenue bike lanes into three street segments: O Johnson Avenue: Orcutt Road to Lizzie Street: Staff provided an overview of seven cross section alternates. Public input lasted over two and a half hours and was vociferous at times. The minutes of the workshop meeting are attached as Exhibit D. At the end of the discussion, Staff polled the attendants to test their preferences for the seven alternatives identified by staff and an alternate identified by a member of the audience. The poll results are shown on the following page. The "No Project" alternative received the most support with 53% of the response while other alternates received 47% of the response. All attendees were given two votes to enable them to show a preference for a second choice. O Johnson Avenue: Lizzie to Buchon: A significant number of residents had left the work shop after the discussion of the previous segment of Johnson had ended. Staff reviewed six alternate cross sections for the segment of Johnson that passes under the railroad bridge. These alternates were a variation of a four lane vs. a three lane street design. Much of the discussion centered around issues of motorist and bicyclist safety. Responses to concern for safety included: — Require bicyclists use San Luis Drive as an alternate route. — Advise bicyclists to use San Luis Drive as an alternate route. — Tell the bicyclist to ride in the center of the northbound curb lane to traverse the area. — Stripe and sign the curb lane (northbound)as a "shared bicycle and traffic lane." — Eliminate one northbound traffic lane, strip a shoulder area but do not sign it as a bike lane to avoid implied safety. — Eliminate one northbound traffic lane and create one very wide traffic lane to be shared by bikes and cars. — Eliminate one northbound traffic lane and install bike lanes to accommodate bicyclists that will use the street. — Eliminate one traffic lane to avoid the weaving movements of cars going down the hill and use the extra space for bike lanes. At the end of the discussion, Staff polled the residents in attendance to determine their support of a "four lane" or "three lane" street alternative. The results of the pole are shown on the following pages. �ti��i ►►�Illll��ui►��► city of san'Luis OBlspo i COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Johnson Avenue Area Questionnaire Response ay 1994) Identify your preferred street design for Johnson Avenue (Lime to Orcutt): Street Design Alternatives Live On Johnson Off Johnson Totals Slightly widen the traffic lanes, remove curb parking on both 6 (9%) 42 (14%) 48 (13%) sides of the street and install wide bike lanes next to the curb. Eliminate one traffic lane in each direction, install a turn lane 13 (20%) 46 (15%) 59 (16%) in the center of the street, keep curb parking and install wide bike lanes on the outside of curb parking (the same design used on Foothill Boulevard near the western edge of the City). Narrow all of the traffic lanes, keep the curb parking, and 17 (26%) 50 (16%) 67 (18%) install narrow bike lanes on the outside of curb parking. Leave the street the way it is today. (1) 25 (39%) 156 (51%) 181 (49%) Other 4 (6%) 10 (4%) 14 4% 2 Totals 65 (100%) 304 (100%) 369 (100%) Please check the features that the City should consider: 122 More enforcement of speed limit 38 Landscaped medians in street 110 Leave the street the way it is today (3) 37 Pedestrian benches 87 More visible cross walks 22 Other ideas 72 More street trees 20 Small pedestrian plains 59 Improve street lighting 14 Turning circles at intersections 58 Lower speed limit 11 Speed bumps 45 Stop signs 7 Narrower streets at intersections 38 Wider sidewalks with landscaped parkways (1) Those preferring that Johnson Avenue not be changed made the following comments: Bicyclists do not obey the vehicle code nor pay for the streets they use; why should the City try and accommodate these people? There are not enough bicyclists using Johnson Avenue to warrant changing the street's design; we should not be wasting money on bike lanes because they will only be used by a minority; the best solution should serve the most people. The speed limit on Johnson Avenue should be enforced but the design of the street should not be changed. Johnson Avenue is too dangerous a street — too much high speed traffic — for bicyclists; they should use some other route. Seniors can't ride bicycles; and Johnson Avenue is to steep anyway; I depend on my car to get around. (2) Other options:removing parking on one side of the street and installing bike lanes on both sides of Johnson Avenue (Class II-A and II-B;expanding sidewalks and separating bike lanes from vehicle lanes;applying options#1 through #4 to various sections of Johnson Avenue; and route all bike traffic onto the railroad right-of-way. (3) 51% of the people who checked this option("Leave the street the way it is today)also checked other options. This may indicate that respondents would support other options(including things like enforced speed limits)so long as the design of the roadway(as illustrated in the previous question)was not changed. ?-3 "°��►�ul�lllll��l�� l�� city of San tins OBI SPO = COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Results of Poll Taken At Johnson Avenue Workshop For Establishing Bike Lanes Between Lizzie and Orcutt Road Alternate Votes 1 Slightly widen the traffic lanes, remove curb parking on both sides of the street and install 0 (0%) wide bike lanes next to the curb. LA Between Lime and Ella, retain current striping pattern (parking prohibited on both sides with bike lanes against curbs). From Ella Street south, slightly narrow the travel 0 (0%) lanes, remove parking along the east side of Johnson Avenue, install a bike lane adjacent to curb along the east side and bike lanes adjacent to parking bay along west side. 2 Eliminate one traffic lane in each direction, install a turn lane in the center of the street, keep curb parking and install wide bike 26 (16%) lanes on the outside of curb parking (the same design used on Foothill Boulevard near the western edge of the City). .3 Narrow all of the traffic lanes, keep the curb 32 (20%) parking,and install narrow bike lanes on the outside of curb parking. 4 Leave the street the way it is today. (1) 87 (53%) 5 Eliminate one southbound traffic lane south of Ella Street. Redesign the street to have 13 (8%) two northbound traffic lanes, bike lanes and parking on both sides of the street. 6 From Ella Street to Bishop Street, slightly narrow the travel lanes, remove parking along the east side of Johnson Avenue, 2 (1%) install a bike lane adjacent to curb along the east side and bike lanes adjacent to parking bay along west side. From Bishop Street south to Orcutt Road, eliminate a travel lane in each direction and restripe the street for two traffic lanes, center turn lane, two six-foot bike lanes and parking on both sides of the street. 7 Selectively remove curb parking and weave 4 (2%) the travel lanes to slow traffic. TOTAL 164 (100%) • �� Ilul�liP ll�lll city of San LUIS OBISpo SINGo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Results of Poll Taken At Johnson Avenue Workshop For Establishing Bike Lanes Between Lizzie and Buchon Alternate Votes 1 Retain street as a four-lane roadway. 22 (59%) 2 Establish a three-lane roadway. 15 (41%) TOTAL 37 (100%) ❑ Johnson Avenue: Buchon Street to Monterey Street. This segment was not discussed since it was 10:35 pm and most residents were leaving the building. (Mrs. Evayln Talmage had previously indicated that she had thought the plan for Johnson Avenue has already been decided by the Council and was wondering why it was being again reconsidered.) This street segment was not discussed but is evaluated in the following report section. Likewise, a general discussion of neighborhood improvements that may control traffic speeds or the improve the liveability of Johnson Avenue were not discussed.. Speed of traffic was mentioned as a concern by some residents. However, there was no specific discussion about installing facilities to slow traffic. A resident suggested that parking be selectively removed from Johnson Avenue and travel lanes weaved to slow traffic and provide opportunities for bike lanes (see Alternate 7 above). However, this particular concept received little support from the residents. Also, a few residents suggested that Flora and Augusta Streets should be used by bicyclists as an alternate to Johnson Avenue. However, one resident of Augusta Street objected to this suggestion. (The Council should review the questionnaire responses to get some idea on resident ideas.) II. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATES The following presents Staff's evaluation of three segments of Johnson Avenue and separate recommendations for each segment. Staff recommends that the Council discuss each segment separately, invite public comment, then vote to determine Council concurrence with-or divergence from Staff recommendation. A. Segment: Lizzie Street to Orcutt Road The May 19th workshop identified a number of ideas and concerns that are responded to in the following evaluation of alternates. Alternate ideas for bike lanes suggested by area residents included weaving the street, selectively removing curb parking to slow traffic down (Alternate 7 shown on the previous page) and using Flora and Augusta Streets as alternates bike routes to Johnson Avenue. There was testimony from male adult bicyclists that Johnson Avenue posed no safety problem. There was testimony from a female adult rider that bike lanes were needed to improve safety; and there was no testimony from children concerning their needs. 7-5 ��i►uulllllll�l► ��`I city of San LUIS OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Nine alternates are presented on the following pages. Alternative #6 is Staff s recommended design while Alternate #4 is the No Project alternate. The cross sections shown on the following pages are the same ones that were presented at Johnson Avenue work shop. Alternates #7 and #8 were devised subsequent to the workshop. All alternates do not change the curb-to-curb dimension of the roadway but suggest alternate allocations of space for vehicle parking, traffic lanes and bike Ianes. ALTERNATE 1: Slightly widen the traffic lanes, remove curb parking on bothsides of the street and install wide bike lanes next to the curb. 64 FT.WIDE STREET 7 F 7 F BOLE 13 FT 12 FT 12 Fr 13 FT BIKE LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE • �1 ®® ® o e iu d : :....... .•. Alternate 1 would eliminate curb area available for parking along about a 1 mile segment of Johnson Avenue, south of Ella Street. Field surveys of the use of these spaces have not been recently conducted since both the Bicycle Committee and Staff have not previously recommended this particular alternative. Parking surveys conducted prior to the adoption of the 1985 Bicycle Facility plan indicated the following utilization ranges: Street Segment AM Peak Use PM Peak Use Side of Street Ella to Bishop 36% 26% West Bishop to Laurel 8% 10% West Laurel to Orcutt 23% 3_4% West Based on past surveys and field experience, parking utilization along Johnson Avenue south of Ella Street is low. Most land uses have adequate off-street parking lots or driveways that can accommodate the low levels of on-street parking demand although some dwellings along the west side of Johnson Avenue may depend on curb area for guest parking because of limited off-street,parking. Peak use periods at churches that front Johnson Avenue may generate a higher demand for curb parking. Staff believes that this alternative would safely accommodate bicycle traffic. Seven-foot wide bike lanes are recommended to avoid adjoining land owners confusing the bicycle lane with an 8-foot parking bay. If wider bike lanes are desired, all traffic lanes could be set at 12 foot and special pavement markings (additional painted decals, stripes or color) used to designate the bike lanes. mN�l�ll(VII�I��Inu�IVl��ll MY of San LUIS OBISPO Mran COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT As a sub-alternative to Alternates 1, 1.A, 69 7 and 8 (all involving parking removal) the City could establish 7.5- to 8-foot wide bike lanes and allow curb parking in the bike lane during evening hours for guests and residents. This strategy would reduce the impact of parking removal but would increase parking enforcement efforts to a limited extent during daylight hours. The bike lanes would need to be vacated during daylight hours and peak commute periods (eg. 7:30 am to 5:30 pm). Providing wider traffic lanes will tend to sustain or encourage an increase in traffic speeds along Johnson Avenue. From a mobility perspective, this can be seen as a benefit. However, from a neighborhood quality perspective, higher traffic speed is a significant reason for concern. ALTERNATE 1.A: Between Lizzie and Ella,retain current striping pattern (parking prohibited on both sides with bike lanes against curbs). From Ella Street south, slightly narrow the travel lanes, remove parking along the east side of Johnson Avenue, install a bike lane adjacent to curb along the east side and bike lanes adjacent to parking bay along west side. G4 FT.WIDE STREET FT B5T 1 I FT 11 FT 11 FT 11 FT FT BIKE e FT LAN[ TRAFFIC LANE TRArRC LANE TRA MC LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE PARKING off'' N=C�71 I' u__ �I ___F _ C Alternate l.A: would eliminate curb parking areas along the east side of Johnson Avenue between Ella and Orcutt Road. The east side was chosen for parking removal because: ❑ Curb parking is more lightly used along the east side. ❑ More parcels gain access from cross streets that also provide curb parking. ❑ There are larger R-I-zoned lots along the east of the street which should provide greater off- street parking opportunities. A smaller lotting pattern (with 60' frontages is more prevalent along the west side of Johnson and lots are smaller and offer more limited parking options. ❑ There are large institutional uses along the east side.(County Hospital, Bishop Medical Center, two churches, and the PG&E substation) that have off street parking and/or side street curb parking. 7W7 �i°� ►�I�II��I�n��l��l� City Of San WIS OBISPO MWIFis COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT This alternative would have a limited'impact on curb parking availability. Parking impacts would be further limited if curb parking was allowed during evening hours. A limited number of residents may have difficulty parking off street because of the sloping nature of their driveways. Staff believes that this alternative would safely accommodate bicycle traffic. This alternative would provide bike lanes that meet minimum standards set by the Bicycle Transportation Plana Narrowing the travel lanes from 12' to 11' would have minimal effects on traffic speeds (about a 3% reduction from current critical speed levels) but could increase side swipe accidents. ALTERNATE 2: Eliminate one traffic lane in each direction, install a turn lane in the center of the street, keep curb parking and install wide bike lanes on the outside of curb parking (the same design used on Foothill Boulevard near the western edge of the City). 64 FT.WIDE STREET 6 FT 6 FT 8 FT. Bpm 12 FT 12 FT CENTER 12 FT BIKE 8 FT PARKNG LANE TRAFFIC LANE TURN LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE PARKING Field surveys conducted in 1990 indicate that the traffic speeds along this segment range from 42 to 44 mph (85th percentile speed). The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Existing traffic volumes and level of service are presented later in this report. (Note: "More enforcement of the speed limit" received the greatest number of questionnaire responses from Johnson Area residents.) . Past contacts with area residents have indicated some confusion about the proposed design for bicycle lanes along this street segment. Some residents indicated that proposals to remove parking north of Buchon Street might also apply to their segments of Johnson Avenue. In fact, the plans prepared by Boyle Engineering indicate that no additional curb parking would be removed along Johnson Avenue south of Ella Street. One issue involving this street segment includes the potential traffic congestion by the elimination of one traffic lane in each direction. Congestion levels are expressed in terms of a level of services (LOS) letter designation. LOS A is free flow traffic while LOS F is grid lock congestion. The City's draft Circulation Element recommended by the Planning Commission suggests that LOS for City arterial streets outside the downtown not exceed LOS D. "V ��► ��IIIIIIIIlI�°N'�q�III city of San LUIS OBISPO i COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT The table on the following page indicates that the traffic carrying capacity of Johnson Avenue south of Lizzie Street is severely underused. Furthermore, with minimal traffic increases forecasted for this corridor (based on the Planning Commission's recommended Land Use Element), the street will continue to be underused (especially south of Bishop Street) for the build out period of the Land Use Element or about 30 years. With the removal of a travel lane in each direction to accommodate bike lanes, under future traffic conditions, good traffic flow conditions will be maintained. Severe traffic congestion should not result. However, during peak periods, Staff would expect traffic speeds to be reduced somewhat with speeds approaching the posted 35 mph speed limit. Another issue concerning the proposed design is the ease of exiting properties that front this segment of Johnson Avenue. Currently, vehicles that back out of driveways must back into the outside travel lane if a car is parked at the curb. With the proposed design, there is a concern that cars will not be able to back out of driveways because the single traffic lane will be so full as to preclude access. The proposed design includes an 8-foot parking bay and a 6-foot bike lane.on both sides of the street. Either of these areas (individually or in combination) can temporarily accommodate a vehicle with only minimal (if any) intrusion into the traffic lane. Also, the traffic lane is 12 feet wide which provides sufficient room to maneuver and there is a adjoining centerturn lane that is available if need be. The current and forecasted levels of traffic on Johnson Avenue will provide sufficient gaps in traffic flow to allow access for motorists backing out of their driveways. Foothill Boulevard west of Tassajar Street is an identical street design, has single family residential frontages, and has similar traffic levels and time distributions. Staff has not received complaints about access to the street from backing vehicles. Also, the wide bike lane on the outside of the parking bays provides better sight distances for people entering the street from adjoining properties. It is possible that under heavy traffic flow, traffic speeds along Johnson Avenue could be slowed somewhat as cars back into the street. However, current and forecasted traffic levels provide sufficient gaps in the traffic to accommodate these vehicle movements; and the installation of bike lanes on the outside of parking provides for improved site distances around parked cars for viewing oncoming traffic. Furthermore, on balance, the installation of a center tum lane should improve the safety and ease of access to and from adjoining properties. Another issue raised was the effect that eliminating a traffic lane in each direction will have on emergency vehicle response. As previously indicated, under non-peak traffic conditions, vehicle speeds that fire trucks and ambulances can achieve on a street with two wide travel lane and a center turn lane should not diminish. Under peak or non-peak traffic conditions, motor vehicles will be able to pull to the right into the bike lane and/or vacant parking bays (reference low parking use statistics for Johnson Avenue) to vacate the travel lane. Or the emergency vehicle can utilize the center tum lane to pass any vehicle obstructions. Impacts on response time are not considered significant (especially considering the close proximity of services at the Laurel Lane Fire Station). Staff has contacted the Fire Departments concerning their experience with the "Foothill Boulevard" design and the acceptability of Alternate 2. The Fire Chief indicates that the design should not pose problems with emergency response. Since the roadway will not be narrowed, the design will provide adequate access options for emergency vehicles. ! _ �,��►�ti►�I�Iip�pn�u►I��U City of San tuts OBispo = COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT rl E o C •� � y O N y Q V .. E L c4 ►. C 40- co co jog a a a a as Q � - � H C to v� z � E U y r y V 3 W v1 cu dC Or \000O MN 00 i O K Q N = � a E � y � L W a' L .. � V E c E pE MuLw 00 en F N I- %n O \0 c y ¢ O H Q O CO N M N E O 0 0 m. ITWM � Cj o '° 4lwo � ti p,U• � -sC _.+ L Q> c E0 e0 cc v� v, H 3 Q c o o C r �' L •N ccQy y L d E M Q `� m .a rn = y = 3 v� cln conZ Z d .0 F \.Q yO z C14 L .CC Q n n �i�� ►►�ulllllllliP►' 11UIII city of San LUIS OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ALTERNATE 3: Narrow all of the traffic lanes, keep the curb parking, and install narrow bike lanes on the outside of curb parking. 64 FT.WIDE STREET 4.5 FT 10 FT 10 FT 10 FT 10 FT 4.5 FT 7.5 FT BOG TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC BKE 7.5 FT PARKING LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE PARKING 1 s D Alternate 3 would provide for minimal bicycle lanes and traffic lanes while maintaining curb parking on both sides of the street. This alternate would not meet bike lane standards as presented in the Bicycle Transportation Plan. Vehicle lanes would be of minimal width. Given the curving street alignment and its gradient, traffic speeds that are affected by grade, and the fact that Johnson Avenue is a bus route, minimal lanes for cyclists and motorists cannot be recommended as an acceptable solution along this particular street segment. • Compared with standard-width traffic lanes (12-foot), narrower traffic lanes (10-foot lanes) can slow traffic down by about 7%. However, given low traffic volumes and topography, narrow lanes along this particular corridor may not significant effect traffic speed. Motorists will simply straddle the lanes under low traffic volume situations. The City may experience additional side swipe vehicle accidents given the physical characteristics of this roadway segment (its horizontal and vertical alignment). Parking would be retained on both sides of Johnson Avenue except for a small segment between Bishop Street and Ella Street where the roadway narrows from 64 to 60 feet. To provide continuous bike lanes in this area, narking would need to be removed from one side of the street: ALTERNATE 4: No Project: Leave the street the way it is today. 64 FT.WIDE STREET 8 FT 12 FT 12 FT 12 FT 12 FT 8 FT B%9KNG TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE PARIQNG AM O :.;i:::. ......'. I��h�uIII�IIIIIfIIIp►��uil��l city of San lues OBISpo j COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT e Alternate 4 suggests that this street segment not include bicycle lanes but only be identified by signage as a Class III bicycle route. Alternate 4 would not be consistent with the adopted Bicycle Plan which calls for Class H bike lanes. Plan amendments should be initiated by the Council if it chooses this alternative. Staff cannot support this alternate because it does not implement the goals and policies of the Circulation Element, the Bicycle Transportation Plan, nor provide for the needs of all types of bicyclists -- novice and experienced, adults and children. ALTERNATE 5: Eliminate one southbound traffic lane south of Ella Street. Redesign the street to have two northbound traffic lanes, bike lanes and parking on both sides of the street. 64 Fr.WIDE STREET 6 FT 6 Fr 8 Fr Bpm 12 Ff 12 Fr 12 FT BIKE 8 Fr P4RKMG LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE PARKWG 0 LID)- 2 NORTHBOUND LANES Alternate 5 addresses the concern that there will not be sufficient capacity to handle morning peak period traffic flow. The current number of northbound traffic lanes would be retained to handle morning traffic. South of Ella Street, a single travel lane would be retained to handle traffic. Since afternoon traffic flow is more disbursed, a single lane should be sufficient to handle current and forecasted traffic (reference analysis of proposed project for level of service analysis). Traffic lanes and bicycle lanes would meet City standards and curb parking on both sides of the street would be retained. The primary disadvantage of this alternate is that southbound vehicles turning left at non-intersection locations could block the flow of traffic if they have to wait for gaps in oncoming northbound traffic. At street intersections, where left turn lanes are not currently provided, parking could be removed from one side of the street and turn pockets installed to minimize impacts on level of service. ALTERNATE 6 (A&B): A: From Ella Street to Bishop Street, slightly narrow the travel lanes, remove parking along the east side of Johnson Avenue, install a bike lane adjacent to curb along the east side and bike lanes adjacent to parking bay along west side. I��►�►►�u1111111111� ��lll city of San LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT G4 FT.NIDE STREET sic- 1 I FT 11 FT 11 FT 11 FT � 8 FT LANE TRA MC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRA MC LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE PARKING �1 B. From Bishop Street south to Orcutt Road, eliminate a travel lane in .each direction and restripe the street for two traffic lanes, center turn lane, two six- foot bike lanes and parking on both sides of the street. 64 FT.WIDE STREET 6 FT 6 FT 8 FT. BIS 12 Fr 12 FT CENTER 12 FT BIKE 8 FT PARKING LANE TRAFFIC LANE TURN LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE PARKING e Alternate 6 is a combination of the proposed three lane street design (Alternate 2) and parking removal on one side of Johnson Avenue (Alternate 1.A) and is designed to address the concern for "traffic capacity" expressed by some residents: O Between Lizzie and Ella Street, Johnson Avenue would be retained as is -- four travel lanes with bike lams on both sides of the street against the curb. 0 Between Ella and Bishop Streets, Johnson Avenue would be retained as a four lane roadway with 11-foot traffic lanes. Bike lanes would be accommodated by removing parking on the east side of Johnson Avenue between Ella Street and Bishop Street and placing a bike lane adjacent to the curb; parking would be retained along the west side of Johnson Avenue and a bike lane installed on the outside of the parking bay (see Cross Section 6.A above). The eastern frontage of this segment of Johnson Avenue includes the County General Hospital, a large vacant parcel 7-l- city of San LUIS OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT and six parcels with dwellings. Curb parking use along this street segment is light because of large frontage area taken up by County General Hospital and vacant land slated for development by a church (about 77% of the block frontage). Curb parking in front of the six dwellings at the north end of this block is used by residents and guests. It may be possible for these residents to secure "guest parking" on the Church parking lot during times when it is not needed for church activities.) Or the City could allow curb parking along these residential frontages (about 300 feet or 23% of the block frontage) during evening hours when the bicycle lane would not be heavily used and traffic levels are reduced (eg. from 5:30 pm to 7:30 am). ❑ Between Bishop Street and Orcutt Road, Johnson Avenue would be restriped to include two travel lanes, a center turn lane, parking on both sides of the street and bicycle lanes on the outside of the parking bays (see Cross Section 6.B above). South of Bishop Street, traffic levels are generally one half of the levels north of Lizzie Street (12,500 ADT vs. 23,000 ADT respectively). Traffic levels continue to decrease south of Bishop Street (3,500 ADT south of Laurel) to very low levels at Orcutt Road (2,500 ADT). Both existing and forecasted maximum traffic volumes along this entire street segment (12,500 and 16,000 ADT respectively) can be easily handled by the recommended two travel lane and one center turn lane which has an estimated.traffic capacity at peak hour of 3,967 vehicles and a 24- hour capacity of 30,000+ ADT. ALTERNATE 7 (A&B): A. From Ella Street to Bishop Street, slightly narrow the travel lanes, remove parking along the east side of Johnson Avenue, install a bike lane adjacent to curb along the east side and bike lanes adjacent to parking bay along west side. G41-T.WIDE STFILCr Fr SKE 1 I FT 11 FT 11 FT 11 FT DIKE 0 FT LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAP-nc LANE TRA M-- LANE TRA M-- LADE UM PAWING ©LOST o9 0 mM�� IIIIIpp�InNui��l`I city of San tins OBISPO =WMago COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT B. Between Bishop and Orcutt, narrow'all of the traffic lanes, keep the curb parking, and install narrow bike lanes on the outside of curb parking. 64 FT.WIDE STREET 4.5FT 10 FT 10 FT ioFr 10 FT 4.5FT 7.5 FT BIKE TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC BIKE 7.5 FT R4RIMIG LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE PARKING r Alternate 7 is a combination of Alternate 1.A and Alternate 3. For the steeper segment of Johnson Avenue between Ella and Bishop Street, curb parking would be removed along the east side of the street and wide bike lanes installed. The eastern frontage of this segment of Johnson Avenue includes the County General Hospital and a large vacant parcel (77% of the block frontage) and six parcels with dwellings (23% of the frontage). Wider bike lanes would be installed along the segment of Johnson Avenue where traffic levels significantly increase (north of Bishop Street). Between Bishop and Orcutt Road, traffic lanes could be narrowed and narrow bike lanes could be installed. Traffic levels south of Bishop become progressively less which might argue for narrower bike lanes (although traffic speeds, grades and curvature of the street would argue for wider facilities). ALTERNATE 8 (A&B): A. From Ella Street to Bishop Street, slightly narrow the travel lanes, remove parking along the east side of Johnson Avenue, install a bike lane adjacent to curb along the east side and bike lanes adjacent to parking bay along west side. W FT.WIDE STREC-T BpQ 1 I FT 11 FT 11 FT 11 FT DintE 8 FT LANE. TRAFTIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRA MC LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE PARMG . �1 city of san Luis oBispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT B. Between Bishop and Orcutt, leave the street the way it is today. 64 FT.WIDE STREET 8 FT 12 FT 12 FT 12 FT 12 FT 8 FT P4RIONG TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE P4RMNG ai r S.! i LJ ® o II Alternate 8 would provide bike lanes along the steepest segment of Johnson Avenue that experiences increased traffic levels. Segments south of Bishop Street would not include bike lanes. This segment of Johnson would continue to be inhospitable for novice riders but may be acceptable for experienced riders so long as high daytime curb parking vacancy rates are retained. Implementation of this alternative will require amendment to the adopted Bicycle Transportation Plan. Segments of Johnson Avenue south of Bishop Street would be redesignated from Class to bike lanes to Class III bike route. STAFF RECOMMENDATION A summary comparison of alternates is provided on the following page. Staff believes that implementation of the Circulation Element that promotes alternative transportation and the 1994 Bicycle Plan requires the City to install bicycle lanes where current bicycle traffic may be light. If the City is to increase the use of alternative transportation to maintain and improve air and neighborhood quality, then it must provide facilities that attract patrons and improve safety for pedestrians, novice and experienced bicyclists, and transit riders. A 1990 survey of City residents indicates that the provision of bicycle paths and lanes would encourage both experienced and novice riders to bicycle more often. Staff believes that Alternate 6 best accommodates all the competing transportation needs and should be implemented because it: ❑ Maintains four traffic lanes along a section of Johnson Avenue where traffic exceeds collector street levels. ❑ Provides wide bicycle lanes that will serve experienced and novice bicyclists, both adults and children. '��M�i ►�NIIIO�� '�►��II city of San LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ❑ Reserves traffic capacity to handle potential increases in vehicle traffic. ❑ Minimizes the reduction in curb parking. The City Council should support bicycle lanes, as envisioned by Alternative 6, and direct Staff to work with Boyle Engineering to redesign the section of Johnson Avenue between Ella Street and Bishop Street. (Note: it is assumed that the block between Lizzie and Ella would remain as it is currently striped.) If the City Council cannot support Alternative 6, Staff recommends that it select one of the following alternates, identified in Staff priority order, Alternate #2 Eliminate one travel lane in each direction and install wide bike lanes on the outside of parking bays. Alternate #1.A Eliminate parking along the east side of Johnson and retain as four lane street with wide bike lanes. Alternate #7 Eliminate parking along the east side from Ella to Bishop; narrow traffic lanes and install narrow bike lanes from Bishop to Orcutt. Alternate #8 Parking removal along the east side from Ella to Bishop; leave the street the way it is south of Bishop Street. / 7 ��i ►i�lfllllllll�° ll�lll city of San LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY COMPARISON OF ALTERNATES Johnson Avenue: Lizzie Street to Orcutt Road Alternate Desirable Desirable Impact on Curb Amend Bike Lane Width Traffic Lane Width Parking Arra B i k e Plan 1 Remove parking both Yes Yes 100% removed No sides of street (1) LA Remove parking one Yes Yes 50% removed No side of street (1) 2. Eliminate 2 traffic lanes Yes Yes None No (Staff Recommendation) 3 Narrow traffic lanes No No 3% removed No with narrow bike lanes 4 No Project No Yes None Yes 5 Remove one traffic Yes Yes None No lane 6 Combination project w/ Yes Yes 9% removed No Alternate LA (1) 7. Alt LA with Alt 3 Yes/No Yes/No 9% removed No (1) 8. Alt 1.A with Alt 4 Yes/No Yes 9% removed Yes (1) NOTES (1) These two alternates could be designed to retain curb parking during evening hours but reserving for bicyclists during daylight hours (eg. 7:30 am to 5:30 pm.). 7- �'��u�l�llillp��►n ��l�l city of San LUIS OBISpo Moge COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT egment: Buchon Street to Uzzie Street Twelve alternates are presented on the following pages. Alternate#6.A is Staff's recommended design while Alternate #10 is the "No Project" alternate. Portions of the text that are presented in italics type was written by the City's traffic consultant, ATE Associates from Santa Barbara. ATE's full report is attached as Exhibit E. The cross sections shown on the following pages reflect the roadway width of Johnson Avenue underneath the railroad bridge looldng northward toward Buchon Street. ALTERNATE 1: Narrow Travel Lanes and Install Narrow Bike Lanes. 48 FT.WIDE STREET 6 FT 4 FT 10 FT 10 FT 10 FT 10 FT 4 FT 6 FT BIKE TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC BIKE SW LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE SW r M e 1. Alternate 1. Alternate 1 would restripe Johnson Avenue providing four 10-foot traffic lanes and two 4- foot wide bike lanes. At the San Luis Drive intersection, the southbound left-turn lane would be eliminated and the Johnson Drive approaches to the intersection phased independently. The existing P.M. peak hour level of service is A (0.48). This level of service would degrade to LOS B (0.68) if the proposed striping and signal phasing changes were implemented. Alternative 1 is a substandard design since it provides only 2 feet of bike lane width outside the gutter lip rather than the required minimum of 3 feet, and the adjacent traffic lane is only 10 feet wide rather than the required minimum of 11 feet (12 feet recommended). In my opinion, Alternate I is not acceptable because vehicle and bicycle speeds, the amount of truck traffic and the curving street alignment all indicate that substandard vehicle and bike lanewidths should not be used. Also, the operation of Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would worsen and the traffic signal phasing would be less desirable. Finally, the increased liability exposure associated with substandard bicycle facilities is something the City may not want to accept. i�►�I�b►►I�Illllp�p��9�II11 City Of San IDIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ALTERNATE 1.A: Same as Alternative 1 but grind down gutter and pave to curb face. 48 Fr.WDE STREET 6 FT 4. FT 10 FT 10 FT 10 FT 10 FT 4 F7 6 FT BIKE TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC BIT- SW LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE SW GRIND GUTTER & paveto curb face Alternate la:Alternate la is identical to Alternate 1 except the street and gutters would be overlaid to eliminate the gutter lip. Technically, this alternate meets the requirement that the bike lanes be a minimum of 4-feet wide;however, the other substandard and undesirable features of Alternate 1 remain. Alternate la is not an acceptable design. ALTERNATE 2: Same as alternative 1.a with duel westbound left turn lanes on San Luis Drive (See attached Exhibit D) Alternate 2: Alternative 2 is identical to la except the.Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection geometries would be modified to provide dual westbound left-turn lanes as shown in Figure 1. This change improves the P.M. peak hour intersection operation to LOS A (0.56). Again, this alternate is unacceptable because it retains most of the substandard design features of Alternate 1. ALTERNATE 3: Prohibit pedestrian use of sidewalk along east side of street and use sidewalk as bike lane. .48 FrwmsTREET �3p� 11.FT I Q FT 10 FT 1.7,FT 6 rT 11. LANE. TRAFRC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFRC LANE TR*HC LANE 131 k E LANE 4=9 �� IIIIIII�I►n�►�q��lll MY Of San LUIS OBISPO Wa!; COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Alternate 3: Alternate 3 would dedicate the sidewalk on the east side of Johnson Avenue for the exclusive use of northbound bicyclists. Existing lane widths would be modified slightly to provide a 5- foot wide southbound bike lane, 11- and 10-foot wide southbound through lanes, and 10- and 12 foot wide northbound through lanes. Ramps would be constructed at San Luis Drive and Buchon Street to allow bicyclists to ride between the sidewalk and the northbound on-street bike lane at each end. While improving some of the substandard features of Alternate 1, Alternate 3 would cause other problems including pedestrian/bicycle conflicts where the bike lane and sidewalk share space at intersections, a 6-inch drop of" (curb) between the bikeway and the traffic lane, and a nonstandard design which might confuse motorists and pedestrians, and encourage bicycle riders to ride on sidewalks. Also, City staff is concerned about shifting all pedestrian use to the west side of Johnson Avenue in this area since this would require additional crossings of this busy street. The level of service at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would not change significantly with Alternate 3. ALTERNATE 4: Eliminate one southbound traffic lane and install wide bike lanes 46.WIDE STREET BIKE 12 FT 12 FTI Z FT p E 6 5\V LANE. TR*RC LANE TRAPRC LANE TRAFFIC LANE LANE 5\V u Alternate 4: Alternate 4 would eliminate one of the southbound through lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and San Luis Drive. Existing lane widths would be modified to provide two 6- foot bike lanes, two 12 foot northbound through lanes, and one 12 foot wide southbound through lanes. One the southbound Johnson Avenue approach to San Luis Drive, two 5.5-foot wide bike lanes, two 11- foot wide northbound through lanes, one 11 foot wide southbound through lane and a 10-foot wide left- turn lane would be provided. This striping configuration would degrade the P.M. Peak hour operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection to LOS B (0.70). Alternate 4 would meet vehicle and bike lane width requirements; however, the lower level of service and reduced southbound approach capacity at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would not be acceptable. �� ► i�IIIIIpIIP° ��llll city of San Luis OBISPO miming COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ALTERNATE 5: Eliminate one northbound travel lanes and install wide bike lanes 4g WIDE STREET KE SSV LANETRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE LEANNE SSV j j e l Alternate S: Alternate S would eliminate one of the northbound through lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and south of San Luis Drive. The street would be restriped to provide two 6-foot wide bike lanes, two 12 foot wide southbound through lanes, and one 12 foot wide northbound through lanes. On the southbound Johnson Avenue approach to San Luis Drive, two 5.5 foot wide bike lanes, two 11 foot wide southbound through lanes, one 11 foot wide northbound through lane, and a 10-foot wide left turn lane would be provided. The P.M. peak hour operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would be LOS B (0.66) with this striping configuration. Also, the operation at the Johnson Avenue/Buchon Street intersection would worsen somewhat because of the loss of one through lane on the northbound Johnson Avenue approach to the intersection. As with Alternative 4, lane widths with Alternative 5 are acceptable but the increased congestion which would occur at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection is not. ALTERNATE 6: Same as alternate 5 except install double left turn lane from San Luis Drive to Johnson Avenue Alternate 6: Alternate 6 is identical to Alternate 5 except dual westbound left-turn lanes would be added to the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection as shown on Figure 1. This change improves the P.M. peak hour intersection operation to LOS A (0.54). Alternate 6 meets all bike lane design requirements and maintains the existing level of service at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. This alternate should be considered further by the City as a way to provide bike lanes on this section of Johnson Avenue. Continued Staff Analysis of Alternates: Plans prepared by Boyle Engineering that implement Alternate 6 show one northbound travel lane eliminated north of the San Luis Drive turn off to allow for the installation of 7-foot wide bike lanes on both side of Johnson Avenue. This particular street segment experiences fast moving northbound �� i �►�IIIIII�IIn f��III city Or San LUIS OBISPO Mmimis COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT traffic with a traffic count of 13,000+ ADT. Field surveys conducted in 1990 indicate that the 85th percentile speed for the segment between Lizzie and Monterey Street ranges from 30 to 34 mph. Downhill speed of traffic from San Luis Drive to Buchon Street could exceed this level by 10-15 mph. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. Daily traffic levels are almost evenly split between San Luis Drive and Johnson Avenue north of the Lizzie Street intersection. The concern was raised at the neighborhood workshop and City Council meeting that removal of one northbound travel lane north of the San Luis Drive turnoff would cause significant congestion, primarily at the San Luis Drive intersection and approach segments of Johnson Avenue. Prior to the adoption of the Bicycle Plan, the Public Works Department hired ATE Associates (a professional transportation engineering firm) to evaluate this particular intersection and to suggest a design that can accommodate bicycle lanes while maintaining good traffic flow. The consultant's report (attached as Exhibit D) indicates that the proposed design will maintain Level of Service (LOS) "A" at this intersection. In preparing the construction plans, Boyle Engineering evaluated the capacity of the intersection and the street system and concluded that it was sufficient to handle traffic demands. Currently, the San Luis Drive intersection experiences some short-lived congestion in the mornings when people are driving to San Luis High School. This congestion most significantly effects traffic flow in the northbound curb lane that directly connects with San Luis Drive. The proposed plans reserves this entire lane (from San Luis Drive to Lizzie Street) for San Luis Drive bound traffic which increases the queuing capacity for this intersection. Staff met with high school and School District officials on May 25, 1994 and discussed transportation and access issues. School officials indicated that the start time for the high school will be shifted from 8 am to 7:55 am in Fall, 1994. They also indicated a willingness to evaluate further shifting the start time to 7:50 am. Shifts in start times can provide relief to morning peak traffic conditions since less high school-bound traffic will be mixing with traffic headed to Cal Poly on San Luis Drive. District officials indicated that during the upcoming year, they will be updating the master plan for all schools within the District. As part of this master planning effort, an evaluation of existing facilities will be undertaken and future facility needs identified. This effort will include an analysis of the parking lots serving San Luis Obispo High School and the access points to the campus. City Staff indicated a willingness to assist District officials (and consultants) in studying the problem and identifying potential solutions. It is anticipated that reducing traffic to a single northbound lane under the railroad bridge will have little effect on traffic speed during non-peak periods but will slow traffic somewhat during peak periods. While slowing speeds may be considered an inconvenience to some motorists, it addresses the concerns for residents north of the bridge for speeding northbound traffic, especially in the morning when high school students are crossing Johnson Avenue at unsignalized intersections. Reducing traffic flow to a single northbound lane will eliminate the sometimes dangerous weaving movements of traffic -- a concern raised by area residents. Weaving occurs when motorists find themselves in the inside traffic lane north of the San Luis Drive intersection and desire to proceed northward on Johnson and not turn left on Pismo Street. The current weaving movements have the 7' MY Of san tins OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT effect of reducing the traffic capacity of the street. Therefore; eliminating one traffic lane should have minimal effect on capacity and improve the safety of traffic operations. Testimony at the neighborhood workshop from some male experienced cyclist indicated that occupying the center of the curb lane was the safest strategy for negotiating this segment of Johnson Avenue while other male riders expressed the need for bicyclists. The female rider that testified at the workshop felt that bike lanes would enhance safety and comfort; and there was no testimony from children. ALTERNATE 6.A: Eliminate one northbound traffic lane (north of the San Luis Drive intersection); shift southbound travel lanes eastward and maintain two through southbound lanes and the left turn pocket at San Luis Drive (current configuration); install wide seven-foot bike lanes on both sides of the street; maintain a single left turn lane from San Luis Drive onto Johnson (current configuration); provide greater signal "green time" for through moving Johnson Avenue traffic and limit green time for southbound traffic onto Johnson from San Luis Drive. SAN LUIS DRIVE b 0 i � 3 Iro �a �o P S,e X90 \ O 7a: ��ni ►►�Illllp��l jll�Ill city of San LUSS osIspo Mj;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Alternate 6.A is a design variation of Alternate 6. The cross section design of Johnson Avenue would be the same as Alternate 6 at the railroad bridge location (where the roadway is 48 feet curb to curb). However, where Johnson Avenue widens near the San Luis Drive intersection (to 54 feet curb to curb), the extra space would be used to maintain two southbound travel lanes and a left turn pocket. The elimination of one northbound traffic lane will enable the installation of seven foot bike lanes on both sides of Johnson Avenue. Travel lanes would be 10-foot wide at this location (same as current widths) but would increase to 11-foot at the under-bridge segment of Johnson. Alternate 6.A. would minimize changes to the operation of the San Luis Drive intersection while eliminating the downhill weaving traffic pattern north of the intersection. With additional signal "green time" given to Johnson Avenue traffic, southbound traffic from San Luis Drive onto Johnson would experience some delays (LOS B/C). However, San Luis Drive provides for sufficient queuing space for this traffic without effecting other traffic flow. Turning movements from southbound Johnson Avenue onto San Luis Drive would remain unaffected since the turn pocket and two through traffic lanes would be maintained (at current lane widths). 'ALTERNATE 7: Narrow the sidewalk on the east side from 6 feet to 4 feet (Buchon to San Luis Drive) and install bike lanes on both sides :50 WIDE STREET 5"FT10 FT 10 FT LO FT 10 FT 5 FT r BIKE TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC BKE A S\V LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE S Alternate 7 is similar to Alternate 1. However, the bicycle lane width is increased by one foot to five feet which provides a 2-3 foot unbroken pavement area for cyclists riding down hill. As with Alternate La, pavement could be extended to the curb face to the curb face to provide an uninterrupted 5 foot pavement area. Alternate 7 would result in the installation of bike lanes that do not meet standards set by the City's Bicycle Plan and travel lanes that are too narrow when considering downhill vehicle and bicycle speeds, transit traffic and the curvature of the street. To implement this alternate will require the reconstruction of approximately 600 feet of curb and gutter (between Buchon Street and San Luis Drive), the reconstruction of two large drainage inlets, and the elimination of all signage within the sidewalk (three signs) to meet clear access requirements (minimum 36" clearance) to comply with American Disabilities Act standards. �-a� ��H�iu►►�Illllp�p�ll'�11 city of san tUis oB1spo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ALTERNATE 8: Narrow sidewalks on both side of street from 6 to 4 feet (Buchon to San Luis Drive) and install 6 foot bike lanes on both sides. 5 a-F'1 WOE STREU- o Fr ,o FT ,o FT to FT ,o FT to Fr WE TRAFFIC TRAFRC TRAFFIC TRAFFC B04CE LANE LANE LANE LANE: LANE LANE 9r-T r q � Sw B I o C2 9 3W! 1'YI1IV/uJ. . . Alternate 8 would result in the installation of bike lanes that meet standards established by the Bicycle Plan. Traffic lane widths would be undesirable considering traffic speed and grade along this particular segment. The City may experience side swipe vehicle accidents given the physical characteristics of this roadway segment. Narrowing the sidewalks to four feet may discourage their use for access to neighborhood shopping facilities such as Payless Drug Store of Scolari's Market, or to downtown destinations. A review of pedestrian plans and design standards from around the country indicates that narrow integral sidewalks adjoining roadways do not provide comfortable facilities for pedestrians where traffic levels are significant. From a safety perspective, these plans suggest that sidewalks in residential areas be separated from the street by landscaped parkways. This strategy is supported by Pedestrian Safety in California:A State Plan published by the California Emergency Medical Services Authority, February, 1994. In general, the higher the traffic level, the more separation from the roadway is required to provide a comfortable and attractive pedestrian area. Providing for pedestrian safety and comfort would suggest that sidewalks along this confined segment of Johnson Avenue not be narrowed. To implement Alternative 8 will require the reconstruction of approximately 1,200 feet of curb and gutter (both sides of Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and San Luis Drive), the reconstruction of three large drainage inlets, and the elimination of all signage within the sidewalk (six signs) to meet clear access requirements. The pedestrian signal actuator on the west side of Johnson at the San Luis Drive Intersection may also have to be relocated depending on how the transition is designed between this street segment and the San Luis Drive to Lizzie segment. In sum, this alternative would create bicycle lanes that meet City standards but create undesirable travel lane widths (considering road curvature and gradient) and undesirable sidewalk areas. Widening the street to reduce sidewalk areas can significantly increase the cost of the project. Staff does not support /� 1111111i11JJJJJJJlJ$1111I city Of San LUIS OBISPO i COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Alternatives 7 or 8. However, if the City Council supports either of these options, Staff recommends that: ❑ The curbs and gutters be reconstructed so that the surface pavement extends to the face of the curb to provide a six foot uninterrupted surface; and ❑ The City authorize the use of unallocated general funds to supplement current funds earmarked for bike lanes since the primary objective of these particular alternatives are to maintain current vehicle traffic flow characteristics. ALTERNATE 9: Alternative 9: Shared Northbound Bicycle and Traffic Lane FT 4S' WIDE STREET�O 4131T 11. FT 11 FT 11 FT 11 FT SY LANE.,, TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE TRAFFIC LANE SV I o SHARED BKF—/TRAFFDIC LANE Alternative 9 would not reserve separate space for bicycles and motor vehicles. Bicycles would be advised by signage and specialized pavement striping to ride in the center of the northbound curb lane. Motorists would be alerted with signage that bicycles are present and have the right to use the full lane. Staff believes that this type of shared facility may be sufficient for some experienced riders but not for novice riders or children. This alternate will not increase the comfort level of novice bicyclists or for those who cannot reach speeds of 25 mph. Developing a shared lane might also increase the weaving movements of motorists that attempt to drive around bicyclists that are occupying the shared lane. Because of the speed differential between bicyclists and motorists, the curvature of the roadway and the volume of traffic, Staff cannot recommend a shared lane facility at this location. Such a facility may be appropriate on traffic "calmed" streets where traffic speeds are less than 20 mph and traffic volumes are consistent with local or collector street levels. As previously indicated, 15% of northbound traffic speeds may exceed 34 mph and traffic volumes exceed 13,000 ADT. Finally, shared bicycle/traffic lanes are not consistent with standards contained within the City's Bicycle Plan or Chapter 1000 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. 7' ��H�► ��IIIII��p �U�U city of San LUIS OBIspo Nia; CQUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ALTERNATE T0: The "No Project" Alternate 46' wIDE sTREEr q+FT SV eKE 11.FT 11 FT 11 FT 11 FT 6 I.NNE. TRAFRC LANE TAAFRC U\NC TRAFFIC LANE MAMIC LANE SV 0 � o s Alternative 10 would require that the Bicycle Plan be amended to identify this segment of Johnson Avenue as a Class III bicycle route. This alternate would not improve the safety or comfort of bicyclists who desire access to the downtown or to neighborhood shopping facilities at the intersection of Marsh and Johnson Avenues. Some residents have suggested that bicyclists be required or advised to use San Luis Drive as an alternative route because it already has bike lanes. While San Luis Drive linked with California Boulevard provides a convenient connection to and from Cal Poly, it is not a convenient route to the downtown or to the Payless/Scholari's Center and would no more be used for that purpose by bicyclists than it would be by motorists. Furthermore, the safety of bicyclists is not necessarily improved by using San Luis Drive. During morning and afternoon peak periods, traffic from the high school creates congestion along segments of San Luis Drive that bicyclists must traverse. Also, northbound cyclists would have to occupy the single northbound traffic lane on California Boulevard to make a left turn onto Marsh Street against oncoming traffic. Finally, another turn would be required for bicyclists from Marsh Street turning left onto Johnson Avenue to access the Payless/Scolari's Center -- a neighborhood center that the City granted a parking reduction permit based on its accessibility to bicyclists and pedestrians. Staff cannot recommend the "No Project" alternatives because it does not address the reasonable access needs of bicyclists consistent with the Circulation Element and the Bicycle Transportation Plan. Staff believes that bicyclists will continue to use Johnson Avenue and that the City should provide facilities that accommodate this traffic. Some residents have indicated that bicycle lanes create a "false sense of security" by implying that bicyclist safety is guaranteed. While studies have been done concerning the "false sense of security" associated with pedestrian use of mid-block crosswalks, Staff is not aware of any empirical data that shows that this perception is associated with bicyclist use of bike lanes. In Staff's view, bike lanes (much like traffic lane striping) help organize the flow of vehicles within the roadway. Just like traffic lane striping, they do not guarantee safety but promote appropriate use of the roadway. -a �� i�IIIIIIIIIi ��Illl city of San LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION A summary evaluation of alternates is shown on the following page. The City Council should support Alternative 6.A which will provide bicycle lanes on Johnson Avenue between Lizzie and Buchon Streets but will retain the current left turn lane configurations at the San Luis Drive/Johnson Avenue intersection. ��►�►►I�IIUI�Ipp�U� city of San tins osIspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT m a ' U d y N tai ti � v v v y a �. m ``3m m m m °�' � O > m e a a a e a 0 a � 3 ed C n m r o � 3 p � w o G G 3 v m VJ `, y v w � 3 � l o c 3 d e d In c �J 0 0 o 0 0 0 d ca Oq C� F Z Z Z Z Z Z O C Q 3 x E w ems U O 0 7 cc L j C U cc U Y w w w G Gi Z Z Z Y i' } Z Z Z Z ri 9 C Q W w � 0 p Y Q 3 y Fj y >m- >- Z Z a a o 3 930`. Q D 0 w a a o ^, city of San LUIS OBISpo i=lG@ COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT C. Segment: Buchon Street to Monterey Street Four alternates are presented on the following pages. Alternate #1 is Staff's recommended design while Alternate #4 is the "No Project" alternate. It's important to note that Johnson Avenue narrows slightly to a 46-foot roadway through this section. ALTERNATE 1. Remove curb parking between Buchon and Pismo on both sides of the Johnson Avenue and install bike lanes against the curbs; remove curb parking along the west side of Johnson between Pismo and Marsh and install bike lanes; retain curb parking on both sides of Johnson between Marsh and Monterey and install bike lanes on the outside of parking bays (see attached Exhibit F). Alternate 1 involves the removal of curb parking. The number of travel lanes and traffic carrying capacity are not affected. Parking removal was extensively discussed at Council hearings to adopt the Bicycle Transportation Plan (October 1993). The bike lane strategy previous supported by the City Council when it voted on parts of the Bicycle Plan (October 1993) would be to remove parking as follows: Segment Side of Street Pismo to Marsh Southwest side in front Payless, Scholari's and a small office Pismo to Buchon Both sides of street The construction plans for this street segment include the installation of a bulb out at Johnson Avenue and Pismo Street and the narrowing of the Pismo Street entrance. Installation of the bulb out will enable a segment of Pismo Street to be reclaimed for curbside parking. This curb parking can be used by adjacent corner apartment residents who do not have off-street parking and who's on-street parking will be eliminated with the installation of bike lanes on Johnson Avenue. The owner of the duplex apartment, Mr. Michael Cripe, has applied for a zoning variance to allow the installation of a single parking space in the apartment's Pismo Street yard. Mr. Cripe has requested that the review of the variance by the Planning Commission be continued until the Council acts on the bike lane plans. Staff contacts with Mr. Cripe indicate that he supports the installation of the bulb out as a solution to his concern for parking. Also, the Community Development Department Hearing Officer has approved a variance to allow parking in the Pismo Street yard of property on the southeastern corner of Pismo and Johnson Avenue - - Evalyn Talmadge, owner. The objective of granting the variance was to compensate for parking removed on the property's Johnson Avenue frontage. ALTERNATE 2: Same as Alternate 1 but eliminate the bulb out at the Pismo/Johnson intersection 7.3�/. ►►n��►►�Illlllllipt��pl city of San LUIS OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT A concern has been expressed that the narrowing of the Pismo Street entrance will cause additional congestion on Johnson Avenue during peak periods. During peak periods when gaps in oncoming traffic are limited, predominantly one lane of Pismo Street is used at a time to accommodate right or left turning cars (seldom do two cars turn down Pismo simultaneously). During non-peak periods, vehicles cross the double yellow line to turn left on Pismo Street and are moving at rapid rates of speed to beat the oncoming southbound traffic. In past years, the curb radii at this intersection was increased to accommodate these turning vehicles and reduce the incidence of cars hitting the curb line. If the proposed bulb out is installed, during non-peak periods, cars will have to slow down to make left and right turns. Some additional queuing in the left turn lane on Johnson should be expected. However, since there is little congestion during non-peak periods, reduced turning speed and increased queuing should not create congestion problems. Reduced speeds of turning cars should improve pedestrian safety since the southwest side of Johnson Avenue is the primary route to neighborhood shopping facilities. This alternative would retain the current operating characteristics of the Johnson/Pismo intersection but limit parking options for the apartment on the corner owned by Mr. Michael Cripe. However, parking for the single apartment is available along Pismo Street within 150 feet of the corner property. In sum, the proposed design for this segment of Johnson Avenue should enhance both bicycle and pedestrian safety without substantially altering traffic operations. ALTERNATE 3: Remove parking on the west side of Johnson Avenue between Buchon and Pismo and install narrow bicycle lanes. Johnson Avenue (Buchon to Pismo) <---------46'Roadway-------> 11 East 7. 5 5 9 .8 9.8 9. 84 West Side ' ' ' ! ' ' Side i 1 P B T LT T B P = parking; B = bike lane; T = traffic lane; LT = left turn lane. Standards in the Bicycle Plan indicate that for streets with greater than 10,000 ADT (this segment of Johnson carries about 13,000 ADT), bike lanes should be 6 feet wide or greater. For this particular block, given the volumes of traffic, the speed of traffic (30-34 mph critical speed), its use by transit vehicles, and the amount of vehicle weaving that occurs as vehicles select the through or center turn lane, Staff cannot support variation from the Bicycle Plan's standards. If the Council supports this alternative, Staff recommends that parking be retained on the eastern side of the roadway to enable continuity of the bike lanes along the western side of the street. I'J, city of San LUIS OBISp0 Njj% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ALTERNATE 4: No Project. Alternate 4 would require an amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Plan. Staff cannot support this alternate for similar reasons stated in previous report sections. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Support Alternative 1 for bicycle lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon and Monterey Streets as delineated on plans prepared by Boyle Engineering and considered by the City Council on April 19, 1994. IV. FISCAL UAPACTS If the City Council supports Staffs recommendations for all three segments of Johnson Avenue, fiscal impacts will be as identified in the Council's April 19 Agenda Report. If the Council supports a reduced scope for Johnson Avenue bike lanes, the cost of the project will be reduced. In either case, the City has reserved sufficient funds (in combination with grant funds) to cover the full cost of bike lane installation. Alternatives involving significant curb and street reconstruction will exceed the existing budget and require additional appropriation of general fund reserves. ATTACEMIENTS Exhibit A: Households notified of the Johnson Avenue Area Work Shop Exhibit B: Questionnaire sent residents of the Johnson Avenue Area Exhibit C: May 19, 1994 Johnson Avenue Workshop Agenda Exhibit D: Minutes of the May 19, 1994 Johnson Avenue Workshop Exhibit E: Johnson Avenue Bike Lane Study (ATE Associates, May 21, 1993) Exhibit F: Alternative 1: Johnson Avenue Bike Lanes, Buchon to Monterey Streets igh School/Johnson 200s EXHIBIT A a J 202 20 208 0 212 214 R' 210 C. ,g9• a \226 �J246v 242 ' ��. :► 236832 ;_ 240- ^' ' \ \ r •, 602 •' � 528 606 \' 608 r•, cl EXHIBIT B O •'— ° ems ; ° 5 co cts � � m ;I m cl Wy C I �!1 m V o `d E V • }d cd CU 3 W • -y fQ� U N t -C ru S2y uy , 1{{ 3 cl F FFl Qn H '" cam WD Ln Cd CL Cd co c �I` > U � � �� .� �U lk ¢ C O ^ s_ oL.IL 4 ril ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Oi cj d cq V C C C O O '� 3 `" •v c o o C D ° cl y O O U mcz 0 .+ N = N a) o cc $ N 0 0 = v O U •- ^ Imo. yVl ° V L. L. U i. �" Q b=D C cC r 'U LIZ A U 3 V) h (� -o c`a a ra c a a 3 0 a`� o >l r Y o d cd o > > J y ,o � tn _ °Dim > o aa cU ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Q d = s0ap � � rz Leg, Q = = a� a> > s V1 v c O yr Cd C •p .cn V 'y y ° U ° •'• Ir 7 C Qi N V O o o .a L07 .� A d C w N ca O V] y � r� Q, cu `z wt ° >y U � cu L yV •_/ to 0 0 en 0 �yqQ p F O 3 ^ '� C.1 v1 •~ ^C' O to _ UtD WS Q U .? V cae�a1 � tnE= .°] vtz '" s N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ' •L ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ TM EXHIBIT C AGENDA NEIGHBORHOOD WORKSHOP JOHNSON AVENUE AREA Church of the Nazarene Old Fellowship Hall 3396 Johnson Avenue May 19, 1994 Thursday 7 pm DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Introduction: history, adoption of the Bike Plan, neighborhood issues and purpose of the work shop. Z. Questionnaire Results: City Staff will review the response to the questionnaire sent to area residents and answer questions. 3. Review of Alternate Street Designs: City Staff will present a variety of alternates, answer questions, and take comments and questions from residents for each of the following street segments: A. Orcutt Road to Lizzie Street B. Lizzie Street to Buchon Street C. Buchon Street to Monterey Street 4. Review of Other Street Corridor Changes: City Staff will take comments and questions from residents on other changes to Johnson Avenue. 5. Next Steps ADJOURN (Est. 9 pm.) NEIGHBORHOOD WORKSHOP SPONSORED BY THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PUBLICWORKS DEPARTMENT 7w3% ( EXHIBIT E " ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS IIr- 100 N. Hope Avenue, Suite 4, Sarna Barbara, CA 93110 • FAX (805) 682-8509 • (805) 687-4418 ( Maynard Keitn Franklin, P.E. u r R rr Pctert L.Fars.P.E. LC !. RicnarC L.Pool,P.E. Scorr A.Schell LyliLlSUIS Og ��' rgORK5/UT1li May 21, 1993 93047L01.RPT Mr. Tent' Sanville Principal Transportation Planner City of San Luis Obispo 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 JOHNSON AVENUE BIKE LANE STUDY -- The following is our study of bike lane alternatives for Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and.Pismo Street. STUDY OBJECTIVES The objectives of this study are to discuss alternatives for installing bike lanes on both sides of Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and Pismo Street, and to analyze the effects of these aftematives on traffic flow in the area. EXISTING CONDITIONS South of Buchon Street, Johnson Avenue is a four-lane street with left-tum channelization at major intersections. The curb-to-curb width varies from 48 feet to 60 feet. Bike lanes exist on both sides of Johnson Avenue between approximately Ella Street and San Luis Drive. Between San Luis Drive and Buchon Street, a bike lane exists only on the west side of Johnson Avenue. Parking is prohibited on both sides of Johnson Avenue between Ella Street and Buchon Street. Between Buchon Street and Pismo Street, Johnson Avenue is a two-lane street with left-tum channelization at Pismo Street and right-turn channelization on the southbound approach to Buchon Street. The curb to-curb width of Johnson Avenue is 48 feet Parking is allowed on both sides of Johnson Avenue north of Buchon Street. 7-37 Encineerina . Plannin_ . Parking . Sional Systens . Ir,-,act Re',)0rts . Eikeways 9 Tr Mr. Terry Sanville Page 4 May 21, 1993 Alternate 6 meets all bike lane design requirements and maintains the existing level of service at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. This alternate should be considered further by the City as a way to provide bike lanes on this section of Johnson Avenue. Alternate 6 striping is shown in Figure 1. Johnson Avenue — Buchon Street to Pismo Street Two bike lane alternatives were considered for Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and Pismo Street A brief discussion of each alternative follows: Altemate A: Alternate A would eliminate parking on the east side of Johnson Avenue and restripe the street to provide a 5-foot wide southbound bike lane adjacent to the parking on the west side of the street, an 11-foot wide southbound through lane, a 10-foot wide left-tum lane, an 11-foot wide northbound through lane, and a 4-foot wide northbound bike lane. Since the vehicle lane widths and striping configuration proposed under this alternate are approximately the same as the existing, the level of service along this section of Johnson Avenue would not;change significantly. Alternate A conforms to minimum bike lane design standards with the exception that the 4-foot wide bike lane on the east side of the street provides only 2 feet of bike lane width outside the gutter lip rather than the required minimum of 3 feet. Since traffic speeds are more moderate and Johnson Avenue is straight in this area, this substandard bike lane may be acceptable to the City as a trade off for being able to retain parking on the west side of the street Altemate B: Alternate B would eliminate parking on both sides of Johnson Avenue and restripe the street to provide two 6-foot wide bike lanes, one 12-foot wide southbound through lane, one 12-foot wide left-tum lane, and one 12-foot wide northbound through lane. Because of the wider vehicle lanes proposed as part of this alternative and the lack of parking conflicts, the level of service along this section of Johnson Avenue and at its intersections with Buchon Street and Pismo Street would improve slightly. Alternate B meets all bike lane design standards. The loss of on-street parking would, of course, impact abutting property owners and residents. Alternate B striping is shown in Figure 1. QUEUE LENGTH STUDIES Traffic counts and a queue length study were conducted between 4:15 P.M. and 5:45 P.M. at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection on Wednesday, May 19, 1993. The results of the queue length study are shown in the attached table and summarized below. The numbers shown in the table represent the total number of vehicles queued in both through lanes on the northbound and southbound Johnson Avenue intersection approaches, and in the single left-turn lane on the San Luis Drive approach. The number of Vehicles in each queue was r�ccrded at the beginning of the green signal phase on each approach. 7-38 Mr. Terry Sanville Page 3 May 21, 1993 Alternate 3: Alternate 3 would dedicate the sidewalk on the east side of Johnson Avenue for the exclusive use of northbound bicyclists. Existing lane widths would be modified slightly to provide a 5-foot wide southbound bike lane, 11-and 10-foot wide southbound through lanes, and 10- and 12-foot wide northbound through lanes. Ramps would be constructed at San Luis Drive and Buchon Street to allow bicyclists to ride between the sidewalk and the northbound on-street bike lane at each end. While improving some of the substandard features of Alternate 1, Alternate 3 would cause other problems including pedestrian/bicycle conflicts where the bike lane and sidewalk share space at intersections, a 6-inch drop off(curb) between the bikeway and the traffic lane, and a nonstandard design which might confuse motorists and pedestrians, and encourage bicycle riders to ride on sidewalks. Also, City staff is concerned about shifting all pedestrian use to the west side of Johnson Avenue in this area since this would require additional crossings of this busy street. The level of service at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would not change significantly with Alternate 3. Alternate 4: Alternate 4 would eliminate one of the southbound through lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and San Luis Drive. Existing lane widths would be modified to provide two 64bot wide bike lanes, two 12-foot wide northbound through lanes, and one 12-foot wide southbound through lane. On the southbound Johnson Avenue approach to San Luis Drive, two 5.5-foot wide bike lanes, two 11-foot wide northbound through lanes, one 11-foot wide southbound through lane and a 10-foot wide left-tum lane would be provided. This striping configuration would degrade the P.M. Peak hour operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection to LOS B (0.70). Alternate 4 would meet vehicle and bike lane width requirements; however, the lower level of service and reduced southbound approach capacity .at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would not be acceptable. Alternate 5: Alternate 5 would eliminate one of the northbound through lanes on Johnson Avenue between Buchon Street and south of San Luis Drive. The street would be restriped to provide two 6-foot wide bike lanes, two 12-foot wide southbound through lanes, and one 12-foot wide northbound through lane. On the southbound Johnson Avenue approach to San Luis Drive, two 5.5-foot wide bike lanes, two 11-foot wide southbound through lanes, one 11-foot wide northbound through lane, and a 10-foot wide left-tum lane would be provided. The P.M. peak hour operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would be LOS B (0.66) with this striping configuration. Also, the operation at the Johnson Avenue/Buchon Street intersection would worsen somewhat because of the loss of one through lane on the northbound Johnson Avenue approach to the intersection. As with Alternate 4, lane widths with Alternate 5 are acceptable but the increased congestion which would occur at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection is not. Aitemcat-3 6: Alternate 6 is identical to Alternate 5 except dual westbound left-tum lanes would be added to the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection as shown in Figure 1. This change improves the P.M. peak hour intersection operation to LOS A (0.54). '7 039 Mr. Terry Sanville Page 2 May 21, 1993 Traffic signals exist at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive and Johnson Avenue/Lizzie Street intersections. These signal installations are not interconnected. Buchon Street and Pismo Street are controlled with stop signs at their intersections with Johnson Avenue. Traffic count data forthe Johnson Avenue/Pismo Street intersection were obtained from the traffic study prepared for the Payless Store/Scolari's Market Project. New counts and queue length measurements were obtained for the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. Count data forms are attached. BIKE LANE ALTERNATIVES Johnson Avenue — San Luis Drive to Buchon Street Six bike lane altematives were considered for Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and Buchan Street A brief discussion of each is included below. Levels of service (LOS) were calculated using the Planning Method contained in Transportation Research Board Circular#212. Level of service calculation sheets are attached. Alternate 1: Alternate 1 would restripe Johnson Avenue providing four 10-foot wide traffic lanes and two 4-foot wide bike lanes. At the San Luis Drive intersection, the southbound left-tum lane would be eliminated and the Johnson Drive approaches to the intersection phased independently. The existing P.M. peak hour level of service is A (0.48). This level of service would degrade to LOS B (0.68) if the proposed striping and signal phasing changes were implemented. Aftemate 1 is a substandard design since it provides only 2 feet of bike lane width outside the gutter lip rather than the required minimum of 3 feet, and the adjacent traffic lane is only 10 feet wide rather than the required minimum of 11 feet (12 feet recommended). In my opinion, Aftemate 1 is not acceptable because vehicle and bicycle speeds, the amount of truck traffic and the curving street alignment all indicate that substandard vehicle and bike lane widths should not be used. Also, the operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection would worsen and the traffic signal phasing would be less desirable. Finally, the increased liability exposure associated with substandard bicycle facilities is something the City may not want to accept. Alternate 1 a: Aftemate 1 a is identical to Alternate 1 except the street and gutters would be overiayed to eliminate the gutter lip. Technically, this alternate meets the requirement that the bike lanes be a minimum of 4 feet wide: however,the other substandard and undesirable features of Aftemate 1 remain. Alternate 1 a is not an acceptable design. Aftemate 2: Altemate 2 is identical to Alternate 1 a except the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection geometrics would be modified to provide dual westbound left-turn lanes as shown in Ficure 1. This change improves the P.M. peak hour intersection operation to LOS A (0.56). Again, this aftemate is unacceptable because it retains most of the substandard design features of Afternats 1 . 7*4h Mr. Terry Sanville Page 5 May 21, 1993 Also shown in the table are average queues which were calculated using two transportation modeling software programs. The Passer-II program was used to analyze the operation of the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection in conjunction with the nearby signalized Johnson Avenue/Lizzie Street intersection. The CAPSSI signalized intersection analysis program was used to forecast average queue lengths for the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. Vehicle Queue Length Study Total Number of Vehicles in Queue Intersection Feld Study Passer-II CAPSSI Approach Average Maximum Exist. ' Alt.6 ' Exist. ' Alt.6 Northbound Johnson Ave. 4.6 Veh. 10 Veh. 4.6 Veh. 6.0 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 4.0 Veh (Total, Both Lanes) Southbound Johnson Ave. 3.6 Veh. 9 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 2.0 Veh. 1.0 Veh (Total, Both Lanes) San Luis Drive 4.8 Veh. 14 Veh. 5.2 Veh. 4.2 Veh. 4.0 Veh. 1.5 Veh (Left-Tum Movement) Average queues As shown above, queue lengths do not seem to be a problem during the P.M. peak hour at the Johnson Avenue/San Luis Drive intersection. The field study showed existing average queues are approximately 4 to 5 vehicles, and maximum queues vary from 9 vehicles to 14 vehicles on the intersection approaches. The Passer-II and CAPSSI computer models indicate that the elimination of one northbound through lane and the addition of a westbound left-tum lane, as proposed in Alternate 6, will not cause a significant increase in queue lengths at the intersection. This is because the length of the signal green time on Johnson Avenue is increased as a result of the additional westbound left-tum lane and the reduced green time required on San Luis Drive. This additional green time helps to offset the reduced capacity on the northbound Johnson Avenue approach to the intersection. Finally, the City could verify the data presented above and the traffic impacts of Alternate 5, Alternate 6 and Alternate B by setting out temporary "NO PARKING" signs and placing traffic cones on Johnson Avenue and San Luis Drive to duplicate the proposed striping modifications. Please call me if you have any questions regarding the contents of this study. Oil Robert L. Faris, P.E. LR ejd attachments /.�/ teals �+�3ae W CL�.a .a a9 c~n LLI a W z a CD z Wiz¢ Lu Y a ~ W MLU 2 w z �W a > z< Z z Z=1ui Z j cnLu Ma cl oa I 1 I I I ` 1 1 � i •4 , \ I � ala OLLU �/�• / lop H / 7•�� EXHIBIT F <------------46------------> 7 .5 4 . 5 10 10 10 4 P B T CT T B P = Park; B = Bike; T = Traffic; CT = Center Turn .60 o aZ� a J <--------------55'--------------> 7. 5 5 10 10 10 5 7. 5 P B T CT T B P P = Park; B = Bike; T = Traffic; CT = Center Turn A C O r- • 1 c 2 ' w �gm C7 Lu CL z a Joz z¢ waw J �11 WRQ co WQ� > Za aim 1 ZJLij 1 c Q I ZiL I� o � am 13aals NOHone 4 I I I 4 z aa .a 4 I I I 14 I 133HIS OWSId E;:HIE?T LP FREAD ❑ CDDDIRAGENDA❑ FIN DIR DATE '7 91ITEM # ❑ RE CHIEFW DIR KINDTES ❑ POLICE CHF SAN LUIS OBISPO ❑ REC DIR BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ❑ LITIL DIRME GHBORHOOD WORKSHOP - JOHNSON AVENUE AREA ❑ PERS QfFf ch of the Nazarene - 3396 Johnson Avenue MAY 19, 1994 - 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Bicycle Committee Members: Wes Conner, Wayne Williams, and Chair Bruce Collier Council Members: Penny Rappa, Bill Roalman, Dave Romero, and Vice-Mayor Allen Settle City Staff: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer; Jim Gardiner, Police Chief; Mike McCluskey, Public ,Works Director; Wayne Peterson, City Engineer; Terry Sanville,• Principal Transportation Planner INTRODUCTION: Mike McCluskey, Public Works Director, gave a brief review of the history and adoption of the Bike Plan and related documents : 1982. . .Circulation Element was developed naming Johnson Avenue as a bike route. 1985. . .Bicycle Facilities Plan was. developed naming Johnson Avenue as a bike route. 1990. . .a traffic study indicated that 73% of SLO transportation was done by car and 27% was alternative transportation (i .e. , walking, biking, and riding the bus) . 1993. . .Draft Circulation Element . was presented to Council for consideration including an option to change the ratio of 73/27% to 59/41%; currently awaiting Council adoption. 1993. . .Bicycle Transportation Plan was adopted encompassing a network of bicycle paths, including Class II Bike Lanes on Johnson Avenue. He further explained the process of hiring Boyle Engineering to prepare construction plans that implement the Bike Plan. These plans were presented to Council and approved to send out for bids with the exclusion of Johnson Avenue which was pulled for further consideration. He reviewed' various projects, currently in progress as part E CE I V E_ Q' JUN % 1994 CrrY CLERK '13!yr0.C.'. 2 of implementing the Bike Plan; including the Jennifer Street bridge, ..Madonna Road bike lanes and upcoming projects in the downtown. Mike discussed "traffic calming" and the Neighborhood Management Plan (consisting of 5 neighborhoods identified in the Draft Circulation Element in which "traffic calming" would be implemented) . In preparing for tonight ' s meeting, the Public Works Department surveyed those neighborhoods most affected by the proposed bike lanes and loss of parking. Of the 2,496 surveys mailed out, approximately 14% were completed and returned to the City. The results were as follows: Option #1 = remove parking Option #1A = (proposed by neighbors) remove parking. on one side. Option #2 = eliminate two traffic lanes, install center turning lane Option #3 = narrow all lanes Option #4 = leave as is Option #5 = other suggestions QUESTIONNAIRE Live on Johnson Off Johnson Totals Option #1 10% 14% 14% Option #2 21% 16% 16% Option #3 24% 16% 18% Option #4 38% 51% 49% Option #5 7% 3% 3% TOTAL (100%) 61 292 353 Upon question, Mike discussed options used on other projects to reduce traffic speed while installing bike lanes ( i .e. , Orcutt Road widening scheduled for Council consideration in 'June; Broad/Orcutt , Bishop St. overpass to be included within the Circulation Element) . ORCUTT ROAD TO LIZZIE Public comments and recommendations were discussed including: - appreciation of the proposals - support of the bike lanes - support of bike lanes (Option *2) - air degradation vs.. number of bikes. used as transportation - Option 2 for Laurel Lane - - concern for churches and parking for .members - bike licensing, current law and recommendations 3 - safety issues, benefits of Option 2 - traffic speed on Johnson Avenue - supporting data indicating reduced traffic speed - rejection of lanes, eliminating parking, making a gentle "S" shape curve in the road, accommodating access for emergency vehicles traffic calming cost of painting streets ( $1.50,000) left turn into driveways recreational driving reduce speed "Bicycle friendly City" , potential accidents, uniqueness of Johnson Avenue underpass, European routes, traffic count Laurel/Southwood, no parking removal - student accessing lanes, restrictions ambulance route, right turns, Scolari Center - community benefit - opposition to bike lanes, issuing tickets - Railroad right-of-way, emphasis from Tank Farm Road to Cal Poly - difficulty with railroad, expenses, long range Master Plan - safety at lights, pedestrian. crossing, signal at Sydney - affects on six churches located on Johnson Avenue - previous contributions towards bikers, access to medical services - opposition to constricting traffic - improvement. to the environment - no bike lanes in China which has many bikers - support of Class III - problems near SLO High School - support of City accomodating bikers The following ideas were proposed as alternatives : 1 . Bike lanes on sidewalks ' 2. Narrow all lanes (Option #3) _ 3 . ' Improve signals 4. Lizzie St. signal timing improved 5. Connect paths through the downtown area 6. No parking removal 7. Option #2 8. Option #4 . 9. Partial elimination of parking & weave traffic 10. Option #lA 11 . Reduce traffic speed 12 . Option #4 .13 . Connect lanes to railroad 14. Option #5 15. Right turn lanes 16. More bike ticketing 17. Prioritize railroad bike path construction 4 18. Pedestrian crossing & signals installed 19 . Use of Flora 5t. as Class III A vote was taken to reach consensus on the favored Option. The vote was as follows: Option #1 = 0 Option #1A = 0 Option #2 = 26 Option #3 = 32 Option #4 87 Option #5 = 13 Option #6 = 2 Option #7 = 4 9: 15 P.M. Mike McCluskey declared a recess . 9: 25 P.M. meeting reconvened. LIZZIE TO BUCHON Option #1 = narrow travel lanes/install narrow bike lanes Option #2 = prohibit pedestrian use and allow bikes . Option #3 = eliminate 1 southbound lane/install wide bike lanes Option #4 = eliminate 1 northbound lane/install wide bike lanes Option #5 = narrow sidewalk east side/install 4-ft. bike lanes Option #6 = narrow both sidewalk/install two 6-ft. bike lanes Discussion was held to consider concerns and recommendations toward these Options including: - student drivers, safety for bikers - studies indicating 1000 cars/10 bikers - accommodating emergency vehicles, installiing advisory signs - motivation for creating Bike Plan to implement lane, and encourage bikers - safety issues, young riders - presence of- bikers on Johnson (or lack of) - alternative transportation routes - opposition to the "L.A. look" - various studies at affected intersections - support of Option #4 opposition to reducing lanes, access for bikes _ over the railroad = bike lanes for underpass .. center turn lanes enforcement of helmet requirements false sense of security, sharing & responsibility bikers use of sidewalks 5 -. bike plan booklet - sidewalks used by high school, recent accident - support of Option #3 support changing the existing situation - safety for vehicles and bikes - consideration of a "tube" for bikers only - develop lanes from Johnson to San Luis, under the railroad, through the creek, to Pacific ( involvement of Fish & Game, biologists, Railroad Right-of-way, etc. ) - sign sharing for roads and bikes - visual questionnaires, bike awareness - Cal Trans requirements - bikes/cars sharing. lanes during peak hours (recommended by world traffic calming expert David Engwich of Australia) - opposition to cars sharing lanes with bikes - safety issues - merging - access for emergency vehicles, access into driveways - left turn lanes and right turn lanes - alternative routes other than using underpass From the discussion, the following alternatives were proposed: 1 . Stripe right lane as "shared" bike lane/vehicle lane 2. Bike signals 3. Advisory signs for San Luis Drive use 4. "Warning light" activated by cyclists to point out bikes to motorists A vote was taken to reach consensus of the favor Option. The results were as follows: Option 91 (4 lanes, 1 bike lane) = 22 Option #2 (3 lanes , 2 bike lanes) = 15 Due to the lateness of the hour, Mike McCluskey continued further discussion of Johnson Avenue ( including bulbouts, speedbumps, and lanes between Buchon/Monterey) to the June 7, 1994 City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. 10:35 P.M. Mike McCluskey adjourned the meeting. THURSDAY, MAY 12, 1994 A5 mm Alve 1 Q -� Fear.of 4-Wheel Commuters Keeps Bike Kickstands Down By RAY DELGADO cyclists and walkers are forced into the TIMES STAFF WRITER chant ractice of mingling with rush- our traffic trident statistics make ^ 1 ASHINGTON—Next time you go the.point vividly.Car accidents involv Wfor a bicycle ride, you might ing bicycles or pedestrians killed more consider this: More than 100 million than b,ULXJ people last year and iniured V � 1 Americans did the same thing last year, 75,000,the study said. but fewer than one in 25 pedaled to A recent Harris oll showed that . work even once—even though,for half nearly o a u t bicyc is said they.. ❑ ❑ Eq of the nation's workers, the ride would would pedal to work at least occasion- cs be less than five miles. ally if they were provided with safe. _ m a O c Why didn't more bikers ride to perces to rirTe, ' a '� = a O z work? The answer is one of many To encourage more people to leave On b z found in the "National Bicycling and their cars at home, government needs O Walking Study" just released by the to provide for bicyclists and pedestri- ® Transportation Department. ans in local,state and federal transpor- The $1-million study, prepared for tation plans—building bike lanes ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ O !r Congress, attempts to discover why alongside new roadways,, adding m m R a M o Americans do not walk or bike more in to existin routes and creating side- r- n _ m p o' general, what those choices mean for wal s where needed v v v o g v c\? jm health and the environment and howTransportation Department officials _ U u o people can be encouraged to go from said bicycle plans must be included in r = h here to there by using their feet for the long-range transportation plans something other than gas pedals. that every state and metropolitan area 7 U3 Not su risin 1 , the stud found is to submit within the next eight that bit clin and Mien wou d ma a months under terms of the Intermodal Americans healthier, cut traffic iams - Surface Transportation Efficiency Act an reduce pollution. approved by Congress in 1991. "I[ also will lead to healthier, Local authorities can help further, active lifestyles, an I'mRortant com o- the report said, by considering biking nen o the Pr s earth are and walking routes in land use and law initiative,"ena to a ra Trans oI tion Secretaryenforcement decisions, which could nco ey of bitclists include: i e ere in conjunction with re ease o •Requiring bikeways and walkways the report. in new housing developments. Americans should double the tris •Discouraging suburban sprawl— they take by bike or foot,which would which often leapfrogs beyond the ur- J ave weoDa leave the car at. home ban fringe and puts housing a long _ about 16%of the time,the study said. distance from jobs and stores=while So why didn't more people bike or encouraging more mixed-use neigh- walk to work? According to the borhoods in which housing; shopping study, the primary reason is concern- and work are within biking or walking for their safety. distance. ! Although in recent decades a large •Creating police bike patrols to en- number of U.S. cities have built net- hance safety through enforcement of works of walkways and bike lanes, bicycle and pedestrian laws. many were designed for recreational Local officials also can reach out to . purposes—not to move large numbers invite citizens to play a role in plan- of walkers or bikers along major com- ning. "If you work with these people muting routes. Perhaps more impor- and let them know that they have a say tant, many communities still have no in what the community will be like,.' separate lanes or paths of any kind for then they will participate more," bicyclists. McMillen said. "We really don't do a good job in William Wilkinson, executive direr- most of our cities in accommodating for of the Bicycle Federation of Ameri bicycles,"said Barbara McMillen of the ca,called on bikers to pressure govern Transportation Department's Federal ment representatives at all levels to., Highways Bicycle Program Office. adopt measures to improve commuter. Without the benefit of special routes, routes.